On 15-04-19, 08:09, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.boss...@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/soundwire/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > > drivers/soundwire/bus.c | 87 ++++++++--------
> > > drivers/soundwire/bus.h | 16 +--
> > > drivers/soundwire/bus_type.c | 4 +-
> > > drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c | 87 ++++++++--------
> > > drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h | 22 ++--
> > > drivers/soundwire/intel.c | 87 ++++++++--------
> > > drivers/soundwire/intel.h | 4 +-
> > > drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c | 12 +--
> > > drivers/soundwire/mipi_disco.c | 116 +++++++++++----------
> > > drivers/soundwire/slave.c | 10 +-
> > > drivers/soundwire/stream.c | 161 +++++++++++++++--------------
> >
> > I would prefer this to be a patch per module. It doesnt help to have a
> > single patch for all the files!
> >
> > It would be great to have cleanup done per logical group, for example
> > typos in a patch, aligns in another etc...
>
> You've got to be kidding. I've never seen people ask for this sort of
> detail.
Nope this is the way it should be. A patch is patch and which
should do one thing! Even if it is a cleanup one.
I dislike a patch which touches everything, core, modules, so please
split up. As a said in review it takes guesswork to find why a change
was done, was it whitespace fix, indentation or not, so please split up
based on type of fixes.
>
> >
> > > 12 files changed, 313 insertions(+), 295 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/Kconfig b/drivers/soundwire/Kconfig
> > > index 19c8efb9a5ee..84876a74874f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/soundwire/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/soundwire/Kconfig
> > > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
> > > menuconfig SOUNDWIRE
> > > bool "SoundWire support"
> > > - ---help---
> > > + help
> >
> > Not sure if this is a style issue, kernel seems to have 2990 instances
> > of this!
>
> this is reported by checkpatch.pl --strict.
>
> >
> > > if (msg->page)
> > > sdw_reset_page(bus, msg->dev_num);
> > > @@ -243,7 +244,7 @@ int sdw_transfer(struct sdw_bus *bus, struct sdw_msg
> > > *msg)
> > > * Caller needs to hold the msg_lock lock while calling this
> > > */
> > > int sdw_transfer_defer(struct sdw_bus *bus, struct sdw_msg *msg,
> > > - struct sdw_defer *defer)
> > > + struct sdw_defer *defer)
> >
> > this does not seem aligned to me!
>
> It is, I checked. 2 tabs and 7 spaces.
>
> >
> > > int sdw_fill_msg(struct sdw_msg *msg, struct sdw_slave *slave,
> > > - u32 addr, size_t count, u16 dev_num, u8 flags, u8 *buf)
> > > + u32 addr, size_t count, u16 dev_num, u8 flags, u8 *buf)
> >
> > this one too
>
> 2 tabs and one space.
>
> >
> > > @@ -458,13 +458,13 @@ static int sdw_assign_device_num(struct sdw_slave
> > > *slave)
> > > mutex_unlock(&slave->bus->bus_lock);
> > > if (dev_num < 0) {
> > > dev_err(slave->bus->dev, "Get dev_num failed:
> > > %d",
> > > - dev_num);
> > > + dev_num);
> >
> > It might read better if we move the log to second line along with
> > dev_num...
?
> >
> > > int sdw_configure_dpn_intr(struct sdw_slave *slave,
> > > - int port, bool enable, int mask)
> > > + int port, bool enable, int mask)
> >
> > not aligned
>
> it is in the code. It's a diff illusion.
>
> >
> > > void sdw_extract_slave_id(struct sdw_bus *bus,
> > > - u64 addr, struct sdw_slave_id *id);
> > > + u64 addr, struct sdw_slave_id *id);
> >
> > Not aligned
>
> it is in the code. It's a diff illusion.
>
> > > enum sdw_command_response
> > > cdns_xfer_msg_defer(struct sdw_bus *bus,
> > > - struct sdw_msg *msg, struct sdw_defer *defer)
> > > + struct sdw_msg *msg, struct sdw_defer *defer)
> >
> > this one too..
> >
> > > static int cdns_port_params(struct sdw_bus *bus,
> > > - struct sdw_port_params *p_params, unsigned int bank)
> > > + struct sdw_port_params *p_params, unsigned int bank)
> >
> > here as well.. (and giving up on rest)
>
> Please check for yourself that this is a diff illusion w/ tab space.
--
~Vinod
